Crypto_Carlosa's Categories

Crypto_Carlosa's Authors

Latest Saves

I've been mulling for some time a thread on my opinions on this point.

There's an asinine assumption that all pro Russia people are automatically pro Putin; this is manifestly not true. I personally think Putin sold out the LDNR in 2014 and if left to himself would do it again.


I will be posting this thread in the full knowledge that it will cost me a lot of followers. That's all right; those who know who I really am will be well aware that these are opinions I have very strongly held since 2014 anyway.

@not3bad

@MalatestaCarina

The book 85 Days In Slavyansk confirms what I have been saying for years (and been called a troll on sites like the Junkyard Of The Faker for saying so):

1. Russia could have denazified Ukranazistan with extreme ease in 2014. The people of Donbass were ready and waiting.

Huge numbers of pro Russia people had not fled the country yet. The rest had not been systematically brainwashed and intimidated into tacitly or open backing the then totally shambolic coup regime. The Ukrainian military had mostly defected or disintegrated, didn't even dare...

...enter Slavyansk, and could have been overwhelmed in a day with next to no violence.

2. Putin sold out the LDNR.

(a) First by opposing their referendums
(b) Second by refusing to come to their aid when they were desperately holding on and waiting for Russian intervention.
[The Future of Luna]

In the community there are many investors that are doubting that $Luna can make a comeback.

However I can assure you that @stablekwon is far from being done.

Let‘s explore how $LUNA is heading into the future by talking a look what’s currently being built!


Before we talk about whats being built next, let’s talk about whats not being built.

Here is a screenshot from Do stating that TFL is currently not building UST 2.0.


However I am pretty sure, they are going to launch UST 2.0 and I will tell you why at the end of the thread.

Lets first talk about some key information pieces that will bring us to the conclusion that the end goal is UST 2.0.

Luna is implementing new groundbreaking technology in the NFT space. You could say they are inventing NFT 2.0.

One of the most important pieces of NFT 2.0 is the Darwin SDK which will make evolving NFTs
Do Kwon has stated numerous times that TFL has zero new LUNA tokens, making Terra 2 'community owned'. This is an outright lie that nobody seems to be talking about. In fact, TFL owns 42M LUNA, worth over $200m, and they're lying through their teeth. (1/6)


TFL Dawn (11.28M):
https://t.co/67XVH8t50D
TFL shadow wallet (2.01M): https://t.co/k5k3g02LP2
TFL MM (0.72M): https://t.co/16CqyPcUL4
Do Kwon shadow wallet #1 (19.69M): https://t.co/kfFx1ck8gR
Do Kwon shadow wallet #2 (9.11M): https://t.co/pevv1xT0yR
Total: 42.81M LUNA (2/6)

Do used his shadow wallet to approve *his own proposal* through governance manipulation (TFL is not supposed to vote), told everyone it would be a community-owned chain, and then gave himself a nine-figure score. These are just the verified wallets - there are many others. (3/6)

In the investing landscape, it's important that retail receives symmetric information, so understand the facts and make of this what you will. Exercise caution and know what you are buying. These people have no moral fibre. They will lie for money at every possible turn. (4/6)

There are many hidden truths to uncover, such as how Do Kwon conspired with Delphi to insider trade their own tokens & hand out preferential allocations for personal profit, how some major Terra protocols are shadow coded by Do himself, what went on in the 'Elders group'... (5/6)
"Closed group of validators" is a big fat twisted narrative (not blaming @FatManTerra)

Before validators involvement:
- 4-5 days had passed (yet to see communication on what was done there)
- the whole ecosystem had come down crashing
- luna supply had hit several trillions

🧵


- supply was going through the roof

My observations:
- validators were added to a chat and smart stake was invited as well
- i dont know what happened before me but it was pre-established that there was some potential bug (related to the huge supply and data type i think)

- the experts (devs / tfl / other industry icons) mentioned that if validators agree, then the chain should be stopped to apply the patch
- not knowing what had happened in last 4-5 days and seeing that the whole ecosystem was crumbling, it made logical sense to support the devs

- while some questions were naturally raised by other validators & smart stake, the scenario (my interpretation) was either apply the fix or face the potential of a broken chain
- so many chains (just look around) make urgent fixes in normal situations and this was a crisis .....

... beyond the imagination of most. as a result, urgent co-ordination was done and chain was stopped, dev's provided updated binaries with the fix, and chain was started again
- later on the same was done for disabling IBC at the request of other chains
🧵👇 What if I told you that Mirror Protocol, up until 18 days ago, was susceptible to the one of the most profitable exploits of all time, allowing an attacker to generate $4.3m from $10k in a single transaction? Here's how I discovered this - by pure serendipity. 🧵👇

Let's go back to May 9th, when a Mirror contract migration to fix short rewards locked people's funds by accident. We've discussed this before - that's not the point. But take a look at this thread.
https://t.co/Qaw91D42dz (1/12)

It appears that OP is indeed correct - Mirror developers smuggled in a major bug fix without announcing it or telling anyone that this bug ever existed, which is slightly infuriating, but what can you do. So how exactly did this bug work? (2/12)

The Mirror Lock contract (that locks your collateral for 14 days when you short) lets you call an unlock function to unlock collateral via a list of position IDs. But they left out something crucial... A duplicate check. This fix was quietly smuggled in 18 days ago. (3/12)


The problem with having no duplicate check is an attacker can create a short position, and after 14 days, they could call their position ID multiple times in a list. This would let them steal funds from the lock contract over and over at little cost and zero risk. (4/12)